A Dubai civil court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a company against a former employee, who was accused of misusing his position to transfer over 1.52 million dirhams to his wife’s account through purportedly fraudulent purchase orders and invoices. The court concluded that the evidence provided did not substantiate the allegations.
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from an internal review initiated by the company following the termination of the employee, who had worked in the finance department. The company accused him of exploiting his purchasing authority to create purchase requests for renting photographic equipment, which he then approved himself, leading to illegal financial transfers to his wife’s account. The company claimed these actions resulted in losses exceeding 1.5 million dirhams.
Employee’s Defence
In his defence, the employee vehemently denied the accusations, arguing that the lawsuit lacked credible evidence. He maintained that his role only permitted the financial verification of purchase requests prepared by other staff and that there was no basis for the allegations against him.
Expert Testimony
To clarify the situation, the court appointed a financial expert to examine the company’s documentation and financial systems. The expert’s report contradicted the company’s claims, asserting that the employee held the position of an accountant, focused solely on verifying purchase orders issued and approved by others. The report found no evidence of him creating fraudulent purchase orders or engaging in inappropriate financial practices.
Lack of Evidence Against the Employee
The report highlighted that the company failed to present any purchase orders either initiated or approved by the employee, nor did it provide bank statements or documentation to support its assertion that 1.52 million dirhams had been transferred to his wife’s account. The only verifiable transfers amounted to 150,000 dirhams and were linked to authentic invoices from the company, with no indication of fraud or exploitation of his position.
Court’s Ruling
The court observed that the expert report accurately reflected the actual powers the defendant held within the company’s financial system. The report concluded that the employee’s role was limited to the review of purchase requests, which were created and approved by designated personnel, thereby nullifying the claim that he had unilateral control over the purchasing and expenditure processes as alleged in the lawsuit.
The court indicated that it could rely on the expert’s findings if it was assured of the soundness of the underlying principles and methods applied, notably as the report addressed all objections raised. The conclusions drawn clearly indicated the absence of evidence substantiating the company’s claims of embezzlement or unjust enrichment by the employee, aligning with the findings outlined in the case documentation.
Ultimately, the court determined that the company failed to prove its case, lacking essential evidence that would demonstrate the employee had abused his powers or unlawfully gained financial benefits, leading to the full dismissal of the lawsuit. Additionally, the court ordered the company to bear the costs of the legal proceedings, including a fee of 1,000 dirhams for legal expenses.